Re: [Tagging] The actual use of the level tag

On 22.01.19 22:18, Tobias Zwick wrote: > First, I am still in the dark a bit how this affects SIT with S3DB > compatibility, perhaps Tordanik can explain. My comment regarding S3DB compatibility was about the related issues that were brought up in this thread (e.g. indoor features outside of a

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs. ditch

Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2019 17:12:33 -0800 From: Michael Patrick To: tagging@openstreetmap.org Subject: Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch A survey of international and some national lexicons indicates that the two terms 'ditch' and 'drain' are equivalent used in the context of liquids from the smallest

Re: [Tagging] club=scout for similar organisations

Not sure the scouts would appreciate being labelled as yoof. I know I wouldn't have when I was a scout. Phil (trigpoint) On 3 February 2019 04:58:42 CET, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: >On 03/02/19 13:37, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: >> >> On Sun, 3 Feb 2019 at 12:07, marc marc >

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - building:soft_storey

On 2/3/19 3:13 AM, marc marc wrote: if the goal is to define the seismic quality of a building, That's not the goal. The goal is to have an easy way to identify buildings that are more likely to require attention in the immediate aftermath of an earthquake. wouldn't it be better to have a

[Tagging] motorcycle:scale

Hi, I noticed today that a wiki page for the rarely used key "motorcycle:scale" had been accidentally created as "Key:motorcycle:scale", and moved it to "Proposed features/motorcycle:scale". I haven't made any further edits to it though. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail

Re: [Tagging] motorcycle:scale

sent from a phone > On 3. Feb 2019, at 21:09, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > I noticed today that a wiki page for the rarely used key > "motorcycle:scale" had been accidentally created as > "Key:motorcycle:scale" thank you for this. You are known to put things polite, in all honesty, there are

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - building:soft_storey

sent from a phone > On 3. Feb 2019, at 19:25, Stefano Maffulli wrote: > > Evaluating seismic quality of any structure needs to be done by professionals. this is still my criticism for the proposed tag as well: only a professional can reasonably estimate whether a building has a floor that

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - building:soft_storey

s/flooding/floors ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] motorcycle:scale

On Sunday 03 February 2019, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > I noticed today that a wiki page for the rarely used key > > "motorcycle:scale" had been accidentally created as > > "Key:motorcycle:scale" > > thank you for this. You are known to put things polite, in all > honesty, there are good

Re: [Tagging] motorcycle:scale

On 04/02/19 10:07, Christoph Hormann wrote: On Sunday 03 February 2019, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: I noticed today that a wiki page for the rarely used key "motorcycle:scale" had been accidentally created as "Key:motorcycle:scale" thank you for this. You are known to put things polite, in all

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

sent from a phone > On 2. Feb 2019, at 18:22, Markus wrote: > > While i'm unsure that a mass edit is worth it, i see no > problem in introducing waterway=ditch + usage=drainage as an > alternative way to tag drainage ditches. this would work nicely for these cases, but it would not bring

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - building:soft_storey

On 04/02/19 09:27, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone On 3. Feb 2019, at 19:25, Stefano Maffulli wrote: Evaluating seismic quality of any structure needs to be done by professionals. this is still my criticism for the proposed tag as well: only a professional can reasonably

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

sent from a phone > On 3. Feb 2019, at 02:12, Michael Patrick wrote: > > and 'drain_open' or some such to distinguish it from subterranean drains ( > despite being buried, these are actually sometime more visible than the > ditches on aerial / sat photography ). there is established

Re: [Tagging] motorcycle:scale

sent from a phone > On 4. Feb 2019, at 00:42, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Correct. In fact documenting tags - even little used ones should be > encouraged. > > Further the documentation does not need to be placed in the proposal space, > particularly if the person has no

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

Michael, thank you very much for such in-depth analysis. I would conclude the following from it. There are distinctions between these two terms, otherwise they would not be defined separately. In simple words, a ditch is a small open-air man-made or self-formed channel in the ground for

Re: [Tagging] Fwd: Re: Forest parcel with other landcover (scrub, scree…): how to map?

On 25/01/19 00:39, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: Jan 23, 2019, 11:36 PM by pla16...@gmail.com: On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 at 22:17, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com > wrote: let me just repeat that ... "In OSM meaning of word used as key frequently has

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

On Sun, 3 Feb 2019 at 10:53, Eugene Podshivalov wrote: > > There are distinctions between these two terms, otherwise they would not > be defined separately. > In simple words, a ditch is a small open-air man-made or self-formed > channel in the ground for absolutely any purpose, both lined or

Re: [Tagging] Drain vs ditch

вс, 3 февр. 2019 г. в 16:38, Paul Allen : > Yes, we could switch to calling them all drains and then adding > lined=yes/no, but we already > have ditch and drain. I think it's better to fix the wiki than do that. If it was to select just one tag for the two notions, I would choose "ditch", not

Re: [Tagging] motorcycle:scale

On Monday 04 February 2019, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > But creating such a page or adding such tags to map features overview > pages is misleading when there is basically no or very few usage. > These tags should be documented as well, but the right place to do it > is in the proposal

Re: [Tagging] motorcycle:scale

Hi, On 04.02.19 00:07, Christoph Hormann wrote: > Just to avoid misunderstandings - it is in principle completely all > right to invent tags and document them on tag/key pages without > creating a proposal. * invent keys - ok * document widely used/established keys that never went through a